legacyofkainfandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Famicom89
Welcome Hi, welcome to ! Thanks for your edit to the User talk:Baziel page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! LoK-Aevum (talk) 19:00, September 12, 2013 (UTC) Timelines response Welcome to the wiki Famicom89 – I know you're talking to Baziel, but I think I'll pass on some thoughts re your question if that's alright, since I'm the one who plastered "no evidence" all over that article. First of all, just as a general point, the page is already a bit outdated and needs some work (we're a bit caught up right now with redesigning the site and other things, but in time all inaccuracies will be dealt with...). But, I totally understand what you're saying; it makes perfect sense that these major events can and should have happened in the first timeline, since the Soul Reaver is right there in front of us etc. Personally I even agree. However, these things simply aren't self-evident facts because we simply have nothing to tell us how history played out in the first timeline. How do we know for sure that it was the same general backstory? What do we really know about the rest of that timeline? For all we can say, Vorador might never have been executed, negating half the reason for Kain's decision at the Pillars, negating the existence of Kain's empire, leading to a completely different origin for the Reaver and who knows what else. Do you see how this immediately gets dangerously close to speculation and theory? Well that's why "no evidence" is written up there everywhere. We need a source, or else it's ambiguous. Consider this recent quote from series art director Daniel Cabuco: "Whenever time-travel is concerned, there is a paradox loop of some kind created. But where does an infinity symbol begin? I don't think I can say if there was a 'beginning' to the loop. There's the Soul Reaver and Raziel.. both intertwined ad infinitum." So in my opinion, just because the Pillars and the Soul Reaver are constants between each timeline, that isn't to say their origins and roles haven't been warped or muddled by the paradoxes (in fact – we know for sure that they have been changed – because a big alteration to the origin of the Soul Reaver and the destiny of the soul of Raziel is part of the climax of Soul Reaver 2)! However, thanks for your intelligent and thought-provoking question, and if you would like to discuss it further, I'm looking forward to your reply. --LoK-Aevum (talk) 22:16, September 12, 2013 (UTC) Dubt on continuity timeline Edit: whoops didn't spot Aevum had beat me to it;-) Hi there Famicom89, Yeah I can absolutely see where you're coming from there with your suggestions, but we're not necessarily supposed to be trying to make sense of it all, just present the evidence as it was shown to us - if that makes sense. Each timeline article, tab or section covers only the information we can absolutely and definitively say occurred in that timeline (for example, the first timeline in the chronology section only actually refers to the events we have seen in or had explained in the first timeline/start of BO1). The first timeline presumably didn't really come to and end as Kain left the battle of the last stand, but because the narrative moved away we cannot be sure exactly how the post-Blood Omen or Soul Reaver eras played out in this timeline, hence we son't list anything later on that tab and why places where we might say have information in later timelines but where no information was directly offered in this timeline are referred to as "no evidence". I see exactly where you're coming from though - that's why that section has a note: "Soul Reaver 2 establishes that history admits only the slightest alterations to the timeline possible, so it can probably be assumed that many events and elements between the four timelines witnessed are consistent between the paradoxes, even though only limited information is available to confirm the full extent of this persistence in canon." - so effectively it's not that we're saying they didn't happen, just that we don't have the definitive evidence from the that timeline to say they did; all of the evidence comes from later timelines. So for example the Vampire Hylden war though does probably occur in all timelines but it is only shown to us in SR2 (2nd timeline) - our 1st timeline (BO1) information says the pillars were raised and summoned guardians, but doesn't mention the war. Raziel may well be in the Reaver in 1st, but we don't see it. And though SR1 might well happen in the 1st, we only saw it in the 2nd. Vorador and the Reaver - let's just say it's complicated in earlier timelines, but basically we only saw it in 4th. Personally I'd be inclined to believe virtually everything you've put, but we can't really officially make those jumps without absolute direct evidence of them. I hope that makes sense and explains a bit. All the best Baziel (talk) 22:48, September 12, 2013 (UTC) Response Thank you Aevum and Baziel for your reply. I can see your point of view about the matter and you're right, especially about the future of the timeline because of the disappearance of Kain (so for example, there could be anyone or anything in the soul reavers because we're not sure if Raziel would be executed or even summoned as a vampire...) Maybe the past of the first timeline should remain the same, I think that the lack of information about the Hylden wars in BO1 comes from the fact that Silicon Knights didn't even planned it (in fact those events are made in later games by Crystal Dynamics) but yes, we can't know it for sure so the "no evidence" can still apply. Well, thank you for the clarification and the insightful responses. P.S. You're doing a great job with this wiki, keep up the good work! -Famicom89 (talk) 23:59, September 12, 2013 (UTC)